ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners, wife and son of the respondent No.2, to quash the order dated 03.04.2022 passed in M.P. No.329 of 2022 in M.C. No.62 of 2022 by the Judge, Principal Family Court at Secunderabad and to direct the respondent No.2 to pay maintenance of Rs.50,000/- each to the petitioners.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner No.1 is the legally wedded wife of the respondent No.2 and the petitioner No.2 is the son of the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2. Due to differences that arose in the marital life, the petitioners have been staying away from the respondent No.2, following which the petitioner No.1 has filed MC No.62 of 2022 before the trial court praying for a maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month each to the petitioners, thus, for a total amount of Rs.1,00,000/- per month. She filed MP No.329 of 2022 in the said MC, seeking interim maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month each to the petitioners from the date of the petition. After hearing both the parties, the trial court has granted an amount of Rs.6,000/- each to the petitioners. Thus, a total amount of Rs.12,000/- per month was granted to the petitioners as interim maintenance vide order dated 03.04.2023 in MP No.329 of 2022 in MC No.62 of 2022. Aggrieved by the said orders, the present petition is filed seeking to quash the order of the trial court and to direct the respondent No.2 to pay interim maintenance of Rs.50,000/- to each of the petitioners.

3. Heard Sri T.S. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S. Keshava Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner No.1 is a household lady and is suffering a lot to bring up the school going child, and that the amount awarded by the trial court towards interim maintenance is very meager. He further submitted that the respondent No.2 is having enough source of income and that the family of the respondent No.2 is a business family that they earn rents over the properties and the respondent No.2 is the GPA holder for all the family members. That the educational expenses for the petitioner No.2 are very high and that the petitioner No.1 is not able to meet the said expenses with the amount of maintenance provided by the respondent No.2 and that at least Rs.10,000/- per month is expended on petitioner No.2 and thus, prayed to enhance the maintenance amount.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has submitted that the petitioner No.1 is an educated woman and is working and that she has enough earnings to support herself and also the petitioner No.2. However, the respondent No.2 is not evading the responsibility of bringing up their only son, but since the petitioner No.1 has left the society of the respondent No.2 on her own volition, the respondent No.2 does not owe any responsibility to maintain the petitioner No.1. He further submitted that the petitioner No.1 is not entitled to any amount of maintenance as she left the society of the respondent No.2 without there being any reason and that he is willing to take care of the petitioners if she joins him, but is not ready to bear the amounts as demanded by the petitioner No.1. He further submitted that there are no merits in the petition and that the petition is based on false pleadings and hence, prayed to dismiss the same.

6. Perused the record.

7. The inter se relationship between the parties is admitted. It is also admitted that there are marital disputes between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.2 and that they are living separately. The contention of the petitioner No.1 is that the respondent No.2 used to suspect her fidelity and that after marriage, all her jewellery was taken into custody by the parents of the respondent No.2 and that she was always taunted for want of additional dowry. After the birth of petitioner No.2, the respondent No.2 further has demanded to gift a car and that the parents of t